From everything I've ever read, seen or heard, whether or not there may be other causes for car wobble, the monster flanges on the so-called 'pizza cutter' wheels will either create new or exacerbate existing problems.
My first step in avoiding such problems, particularly for older cars I'm attempting to upgrade to play well with others, is to immediately swap off the pizza cutters. The junked pizza cutter wheelsets end up parked on a maintenance facility flatcar or in a pile in some yard, sufficiently rusted to make overlooking their poor appearance easy. Without doing that as a first step, I've found that all the other fixing I try to do never has the desired full effect. If changing out the old wheels seems to necessitate installing entirely new trucks, I can still use these old prizes on my layout to populate static scenes while final fixes await my budget catching up. I'm a lifetime subscriber to the old adage that some car is better than no car, so nothing goes to waste even if I have to wait to get it up and running. Some of the old cars, even the cheapos, can be really handsome with a little TLC.
My apologies for the confusion, guys. @Ed, I think my car is not an AHM but an IHC. Here's my original post from a year or so ago.
http://cs.trains.com/mrr/f/88/t/290810.aspx
Again, sorry for highjacking an already necromanced thread.
-Matt
Returning to model railroading after 40 years and taking unconscionable liberties with the SP&S, Northern Pacific and Great Northern roads in the '40s and '50s.
"Rivarossi" can be a bit confusing, because the 1960s-90s AHM / Rivarossi cars really have nothing in common with the later Rivarossi / Hornby / Walthers 60' cars (which are based on actual 60' C&NW cars).
Note that Athearn heavyweight Baggage, RPO and Coach cars are not "shorties". In heavyweight days coaches were generally around 70' long, like the Athearn car, head-end cars like RPO and Baggage cars were normally 60'-70' long, again like the Athearn models.
crossthedogHi Ed, my trucks don't look like that at all.
These are the later version of Rivarossi truck on their 'shorty' heavyweights:
Rivarossi Truck by Edmund, on Flickr
IMG_8037_fix by Edmund, on Flickr
Is that the style truck you have and is the wobble caused by a loose-fitting bolster screw?
Regards, Ed
gmpullmanHave you tried Kadee 33" wheels in your Rivarossi trucks, Matt?
Anyway, thanks. I do love Kadee products. Not sure my wobble comes from the wheels. It seems to be how the trucks are mounted to the underframe, and everything I tried failed, even shimming under the coupler and adding proper weight inside the cars. I'll have to go back and revisit all that, but I don't want to steal any more time from this thread's very simple survey question.
crossthedogThe only heavyweight passenger car that has given me problems is an old AHM blue-and-yellow box baggage car, whose wobble I complained about vociferously in the forum here but have so far been unable to remedy.
Have you tried Kadee 33" wheels in your Rivarossi trucks, Matt?
Rivarossi-old by Edmund, on Flickr
The original pizza-cutter wheels are indeed awful.
Rivarossi-gauge by Edmund, on Flickr
Kadee wheelsets snap in easily. A little graphite (I use molybdenum disulfide) in the cone helps. You may have to tweak the brake shoes a little.
Rivarossi-truck by Edmund, on Flickr
Good Luck, Ed
I like the Branchline cars, both the early ones and the ones after Atlas bought the line. They have nice detail and even though they are not as short as the classic Athearn shorties they navigate my 24" curves with no problem. Whether they look sufficiently prototype on such tight curves is a subjective matter, but they don't come off the track. I have one or two Bachmann Spectrum cars, too, which also perform wonderfully and have nice detail. The only heavyweight passenger car that has given me problems is an old AHM blue-and-yellow box baggage car, whose wobble I complained about vociferously in the forum here but have so far been unable to remedy.
[tried to embed a video on my Google Drive page here but it didn't work. Here's the link:]
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p-sJ08R_yakKzvoBVFs5A7vZ0ZwGHmPP/view?usp=drive_link
My top choice for heavyweight passenger cars are Branchline RTR. I mentioned 6 years ago that I became frustrated with the kit built Branchline and it remained unfinished. That's still true. My second choice would be using Rivarossi cars as a starting point and upgrading them with new wheelsets, body mounted KDs, interiors, and maybe even lighting. I know they are generic and not railroad specific but being a freelancer, prototype fidelity is a low priority with me. Walthers cars look good but perform terribly without serious tweaking. Bachmann (at least back then) were even worse. I've noticed their new line of passenger cars are top of line price wise but I have no idea if the quality has improved with the price. Maybe somebody who has bought their current line can weigh in.
It IS interesting to see old threads, because sometimes you realize there are things the OP asked that you'd now answer in a different way- so here goes.
The answer to the original question is "nobody." Which is to say, nobody makes models of early heavyweights, unless the model is of an early heavyweight as rebuilt to conform to later practice.
Pullman converted its passenger car production between 1907 and 1910, in part to accommodate the enormous change that would be required by the construction of Penn Station in New York (PRR planned to ban wooden cars in the approach tunnels, and I think NYC intended to do the same thing in the new Grand Central, both of which were then under construction).
Pullman therefore developed a new steel car system, both for its customers and its own sleeping car business. Interestingly, the early Pullman system did not use flat plates for the sides of the cars below the belt rail. Instead, they incorporated a system that made the lower side of the car look as if it was sheathed in verticAl strips, so it looks superficially like a wood car. It's not 100 percent clear how this was done; John White's book on passenger cars says the pattern was pressed into steel sheets and was only a brief experiment, but Robert Reed's "Train Wrecks" shows a pictures of such a Pullman car after a sideswipe (page 113, if you have it), and it's pretty clear from the damage pattern that the metal stripping under the belt line is individually applied, and not a single pressed sheet of steel.
The window and fascia board design on these early heavyweights was visually very distinct from later cars. They often retained the upper transom window and the narrow fascia board of the last wooden cars. I know of only one example that survives, WM business car 203 at the RR Museum of PA, built by Pullman in 1914 (Whits suggests the practice stopped in 1912). I have examined it, and the sheathed sides appear to be some kind of interlocking system, rather than a continuous sheet. The upper transom windows have been plated over, doubling the width of the fascia board and making the car look indistinguishable at a distance from a later heavyweight.
I'm not sure how many of these cars remained in service as built, and for how long. I would expect they ran into the early 1930s, possibly longer, but that would take some research. I scratchbuilt a model, based rather loosely on WM 203 as a gift for a friend years ago, but I have never seen a car of this type in RTR or kit form.
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
It can be interesting to read my 6 year old responses to these old threads.
SeeYou190Eventually, the heavyweight train I own will either be retired or replaced with brass cars, probably Lambert.
Well, that is not going to happen. My Rivarossi Heavyweight train will be built as planned, and no brass replacement of Lambert cars will be purchased.
SeeYou190I really am not a big fan of passenger trains.
That is still the same.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
I believe Walthers gives 24" as the minimum radius, but it seems like most folks find they need to do some modifications to make them work on that radius.
One thing that has changed since the original post (2017) is that ebay and other sites now have several sellers who make inexpensive drop-in one piece interiors for the Athearn and AHM/Rivarossi cars.
mbinsewi DigitalGriffin Most availability of styles: Walthers. But they take a lot of tweaking to get the trucks to run right. And I wouldn't run them on < R28. They are also the most pricey which makes me scratch me head given the competition. I agree with you. I collected a full set of Walthers Empire Builder cars, the sky blue scheme, and you would cringe to see what I had to do the the bottom of these cars so I could run them on a 22"r. No problem with Rapido cars. Mike.
DigitalGriffin Most availability of styles: Walthers. But they take a lot of tweaking to get the trucks to run right. And I wouldn't run them on < R28. They are also the most pricey which makes me scratch me head given the competition.
I agree with you. I collected a full set of Walthers Empire Builder cars, the sky blue scheme, and you would cringe to see what I had to do the the bottom of these cars so I could run them on a 22"r. No problem with Rapido cars.
Mike.
I never understood why Walthers advertises them to run on 22/24" curves. Just seems dishonest to me.
I know this is old....But...IMHP, an HO passenger consist doesn't have to be 1 manufacturer. For that matter the cars can be light weight and heavywieghts mixed. Both of these things do or did exist in 1:1 scale!
gmpullman SouthPenn What do the numbers mean at the beginning of the description mean? Example: '10-1 open-end observation car. Usually, in heavyweight days, the higher number was the number of "open sections" which was the most common accommodation Pullman offered. There were "tourist" cars operated on some lines that were less expensive but still not as common as a section. In the late 1930s the open section was losing favor to the "all-room" trains of which the Century, Broadway and Chief were probably the first to offer all enclosed room accommodations. Some cars were part sleeper and part lounge or buffet, if food service was available and even some parlor cars had day-rooms available for meetings or privacy for business clients. So there could be a 5 double-bedroom; buffet; lounge; observation car, etc. Cheers, Ed
SouthPenn What do the numbers mean at the beginning of the description mean? Example: '10-1 open-end observation car.
Usually, in heavyweight days, the higher number was the number of "open sections" which was the most common accommodation Pullman offered. There were "tourist" cars operated on some lines that were less expensive but still not as common as a section.
In the late 1930s the open section was losing favor to the "all-room" trains of which the Century, Broadway and Chief were probably the first to offer all enclosed room accommodations.
Some cars were part sleeper and part lounge or buffet, if food service was available and even some parlor cars had day-rooms available for meetings or privacy for business clients. So there could be a 5 double-bedroom; buffet; lounge; observation car, etc.
Cheers, Ed
To add a bit to this, an "open section" had an upper bunk that folded down, and the two facing seats below it folded down to make another bunk. Curtains provided privacy, and there were restrooms at either end of the car:
http://www.northeast.railfan.net/classic/CARdwgs4.html
I found some information on PRR HO Passenger cars from the Keystone Crossings:
Bachmann
Rivarossi
Walthers
Gary
What he said! ^^^^^^^^
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
SouthPennWhat do the numbers mean at the beginning of the description mean? Example: '10-1 open-end observation car.
Here's a quote from some of the text at Utah Rails . net
http://utahrails.net/pass/pass-pullman.php
What do the numbers (4-4-2, 10-6, etc.) used to describe a sleeper designate? I know it's berths, seats and lounges, but which number means what? (Doug Wetherhold, January 16, 2011)
A 4-4-2 car was four compartments, four double bedroom, two drawing rooms. A 10-6 car was ten roomettes and six double bedrooms.
Generally, the least expensive accomodation was listed first, and the most expensive was listed last. In the 4-4-2 example above, the 4 compartments were cheaper than the 4 double bedrooms, which in-turn were cheaper than the 2 drawing rooms.
Most of the time, designating least to most expensive was the rule. An exception would be the 6-4-6 Pullmans, also known as the "S" series, with similar cars going to both Canadian and American roads including the famous "National" series on the UP. They were six sections, four double bedrooms, six roomettes (6-4-6) cars (most expensive listed first, least expensive listed last). This may have been done to avoid confusion with the existing 6-6-4 cars, which were mostly pre-war cars with the "open potties" in the bedrooms.
A three digit designation was not always a compartment-bedroom-drawing room configuration, and a two digit was not always a roomette-bedroom configuration. Railroads had many configurations and a three digit designation did not simply signify compartment, bedroom, drawing room combination. There were many combinations and, as previously pointed out, based on the least expensive to the most expensive room. There are some other exceptions as there were quite a few oddball floorplans. Three digit configurations included a 8-2-2 section-bedroom-compartment room configuration. Two digit configurations included bedroom-compartment (6-5) and single-double slumber (24-8). There were four digit and single digit configs as well.
Although, on first glance, a Double Bedroom and a Compartment were the same size, but they actually were not the same. Size does matter. Compartments were slightly larger and all postwar types had an enclosed water closet. Lengthwise bedrooms had a chair and single seat.
A compartment was larger when considering only square footage. A drawing room was the largest single room available. Suites were combinations of two bedrooms or one bedroom and one compartment with the wall separating the rooms folded back to create one large room.
A question for all the passenger car gurus. What do the numbers mean at the beginning of the description mean? Example: '10-1 open-end observation car.
Thanks
The advice you've gotten re: Pennsy cars in particular is good: Pennsy made the decision to convert its fleet from wood to steel earlier than any other major railroad, in large part because it didn't want to take the risks associated with running wooden coaches through the tunnels under the Hudson River, by which Pennsy trains accessed New York Penn Station from 1910 onwards.
But even on the mighty Pennsy, there was another operator, and at the risk of highjacking your thread, it's worth mentioning. That other operator was the Pullman Company, which owned and operated sleeping and parlor cars on Pennsy trains. Pullman decided to convert to steel prior to 1910, and built its first steel sleeper, the "Jamestown," in 1907. Steel heavyweight sleepers and parlors went into production in 1910, and formed the backbone of the national sleeping car fleet until after WWII. They didn't run on every Pennsy train, but the majority of the name trains offered sleeper and/or parlor service, from the "Broadway" on down, and so Pullman cars were as big a part of the fleet in Pennsy service as B-60 bags or P-70 coaches.
But for the earliest years of your period (say, 1910-1920), there are no commercial models that represent the heavyweight cars as they were produced and run between 1910 and 1920.
The first steel Pullmans (and I am referring here to those built between 1910 and 1916) closely resembled wood cars. They did not have the wide fascia boards of later heavyweights, or the riveted side plates; instead, they had the narrow fascia boards and upper transom sashes that are characteristic of late-model wood equipment. The sides were covered with an interlocking steel sheathing system that was clearly designed to resemble the sheathing of wood cars; the principal external aspect of these cars that distinguishes them from earlier wood cars is the fishbelly underframe: otherwise, it is hard to tell them apart from wood cars, particularly wood cars with steel underframes.
Pullman switched to the more recognizable "heavyweight" design in 1916, probably in part because the slab sides were easier to build and less vulnerable to sideswiping. Most older Pullmans were rebuilt to the new standard in the 1920s, and only a few survive as built; Western Maryland 203, at the RR Museum of PA, is one of the few that still has the side sheathing. Unfortunately, no manufacturer has ever offered models of the older Pullmans in as-built condition.
Welcome to the forum! This a great place to get and share ideas and information.
My 2 cents; I have had Atlas, BLI, Rapido and MTH. Rapido and MTH were the most reliable and functional fo me. I could not keep the atlas or BLI on the track if there were more than 3 cars. The BLI tandem cars came off on 26“ R curves, I sent them back.
The only issue I had with one MTH car in a 5 car set was that one truck pick-up was not making contact with the lighting pickup. EASY fix and MTH details what needs to be done.
Let us know what you decide.
If it's Pennsy you are after, I would look at the Bachmann Spectrum cars, as I understnd the coaches are based on Pennsy prototypes. I have acquired a few, both NYC (which I model) and PRR (which I don't) for between $5 and $20 apiece, and I am very happy with them. (I'm not a rivet-counter.) I need to body-mount the couplers, though I have run them on a train with Wathers HWs and the existing funky couplers, and they did just fine.
The Branchline cars are great models, though very time-intensive to build and rather delicate, and the older kits can have problems. I have built two, one had dodgy trucks that won't roll, one has a slightly warped roof, but I still love the kits, they are beautiful and good fun to put together. (I'll replace the trucks on one, trying to figure out the roof.) I haven't run the cars yet. (Our club has 40"-plus curves.) I am worried about the delicate detail getting damaged.
I have a Walthers B60B baggage car that I love.
A fellow club member has a train of Walthers heavyweights. I like them, though I have to lube the wheels a lot. We have had problems with losing couplers (screws get stripped out) on his Walthers streamline cars. We run long trains (15-plus cars) over steep grades, so we are rough on equipment.
Hope this helps!
NYBW-John I have one Branchline heavyweight kit which I've found to be quite challenging to assemble. It remains unfinished and I wouldn't buy another.
I built six of the Branchline kits. The trucks, of course are worthless so you need another $15 or 20 to get decent trucks. I have maybe another half dozen Atlas/Branchline RTR cars and they track much better (one piece molded trucks with a better bolster) Atlas recently released the paired-window coach and single window coach in several roadnames. Unfortunately, not New York Central which was the primary user of the single window coach.
I have close to 200 Walthers passenger cars and the only ones that needed any king of "tweeking" were the Budd Super-Domes. By nature, they are huge cars and require six wheel trucks and have very little clearance. Still after a little lube and loosening of the bolster pad they run fine.
All my Walthers heavyweights run just fine. There may have been a few that required loosening of the bolster screw.
Union_Sta_departure9 by Edmund, on Flickr
If you aren't too picky, you can find Walthers passenger cars listed in their Bargain Basement or Monthly Flyer at very big discounts. About a month ago there were dozens of cars offered in the $30-$40 range.
The Broadway P70s have a truck mounting arrangement whereby they snap into the car bolster. Poor arrangement that allows no axial motion. After a bit of filing and sanding I finally got those to track OK.
IMG_7041_fix by Edmund, on Flickr
The constant intensity lighting is very nice in them.
IMG_7048_fix by Edmund, on Flickr
IMG_6998_fix by Edmund, on Flickr
At this point I wonder what Royalgunner has to say about all this good information?
Cheers, Happy Holidays,
Ed
tstage While I don't have any MTH heavyweight cars, I do have their 10-car set of the two-tone gray '40 20th Century Limited passenger cars and they are beautiful and well made. Wish they'd produce more. If you like assembling kits, Branchline (now owned by Atlas) offers some nice heavyweight cars and at a fraction of the cost of the MTH cars. Tom
While I don't have any MTH heavyweight cars, I do have their 10-car set of the two-tone gray '40 20th Century Limited passenger cars and they are beautiful and well made. Wish they'd produce more.
If you like assembling kits, Branchline (now owned by Atlas) offers some nice heavyweight cars and at a fraction of the cost of the MTH cars.
Tom
A few years ago one of my LHS had a supply of Branchline RTR heavyweights at what seemed to be a closeout price (under $25). They had them in Pullman Green and Pennsy Tuscan. I scooped up most of what they had. They are far superior to the Walthers line IMHO as far as reliability. I don't know if they are still available in RTR through Atlas. I have one Branchline heavyweight kit which I've found to be quite challenging to assemble. It remains unfinished and I wouldn't buy another.
Mike,
I've had issues with the trucks on a Walthers caboose binding on the backside of the side steps on R22" curves so I can only imagine what the passenger cars are like. Needless to say, I don't purchase Walthers rolling stock.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
DigitalGriffinMost availability of styles: Walthers. But they take a lot of tweaking to get the trucks to run right. And I wouldn't run them on < R28. They are also the most pricey which makes me scratch me head given the competition.
My You Tube
For heavy weight steel cars, the Athearn models are hard to beat. They look right. Every train in the US, except some crack name trains, used this style of passenger car, tight up until Amtrak. They handle 18 inch radius curves with ease. They turn up at train shows for under $10.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
Cheapest: Athearn, RR, Concor, and IHC
Most bang for your buck: Branchline Blueprint series (Kit form)
Most detailed: Branchline blueprint series
Easiest to run: Bachmann. You can run these day and night on R18
Most availability of styles: Walthers. But they take a lot of tweaking to get the trucks to run right. And I wouldn't run them on < R28. They are also the most pricey which makes me scratch me head given the competition.
The worst runners are the branchline blueprint series. I swapped out the trucks for walthers heavyweight trucks. The kit ones were nothing short of maddening.
If you were going to go more modern era, I would tell you to look into Rapido too.
Nice balance between detail, ease of operation, cost for Pennsy: BLI
I have 70 passenger cars and going. Most of them heavyweights. My favorites are the rapidos and bachmann because they just run. I use my atlas branchline cars on shorter trains. If I push over 5 heavyweights, the likelyhood of them derailing increases even with my tweeking and new trucks. I don't own BLI cars, but I seen them run at a friends layout and he highly praised them. They were also a thing of beauty.
to the MR Forums, Royalgunner.
gmpullmanIt is a pretty subjective matter to decide what is "best" as, of course, best for me might not be best for you.
I have to agree with Ed on this one. In my opinion, the best bang for your buck will be the old Rivarossi cars. None, other than perhaps their duplex sleeper, are specifically Pennsy models, but some appropriate paint and lettering can go a long way to making them more suitable. They can be had, at train shows, for under $10.00, and even cheaper at garage sales or on-line.
Adding more bang (at the expense of more money) will get you detail parts to upgrade these fairly basic cars. As I see it, adding your personal input in this manner is a more affordable (and more enjoyable) option than shelling out big bucks for models that anybody can buy, right off the shelf.Your particular expectations and abilities will, of course, determine if this is a viable option for you.
I don't model the Pennsy, but do have some Pennsy head-end cars, and a lot of Pennsy freight equipment, all of which could have been seen at one time in my part of southern Ontario.Here are a couple of Rivarossi passenger cars, with some added details and paint and lettering for my freelanced railroads...
The Rivarossi lightweight observation car looks, at least to my untrained eye, somewhat similar to some which Pennsy had. Mine, shown below, is little-altered other than the paint, and had I kept it, I might have been able to improve it with more underbody detail...
This is a Walthers express reefer, modified to more closely match one in a prototype photo...
Another Pennsy offering from Walthers, modified only slightly...
This is a Red Caboose PRR X-29 boxcar, redone to match quite closely a prototype car still in existence, and one which I used as an example for the added details...
This one was an undecorated Walthers kit, representing a Pennsy RPO. I used my X-Acto knife and some files to turn the Pennsy porthole-style windows in the doors into rectangular ones, then painted and lettered it for my freelanced road...
The use of a few Pennsy-specific cars, such as the ones shown, should give your train enough credibility that the stand-in Rivarossis won't "stand-out" as anomalies.
Wayne
Keep in mind heavyweights were only built during the middle portion of your 1890 - 1945 period. Wood cars (like the old MDC/Roundhouse Pullman Palace cars) would have been the cars being produced in the 1890's-1900's. By the 1940's, virtually all new passenger cars were lightweight streamlined cars.
Here's a link to M.B. Klein's Pennsy heavyweights. These are made by BLI and Con-Cor.
Pennsy passenger cars
Marlon
See pictures of the Clinton-Golden Valley RR